The amendment the government is proposing to the abortion bill seems to indicate that an abortion may be performed up to the time when the foetus is viable outside the mother's body. This is 24 weeks, the Int Tista Ssalvani Coalition said on Thursday.

The coalition, which is led by the Life Network Foundation, was referring to a statement by Health Minister Chris Fearne on Wednesday that two amendments will be introduced to the bill to clarify that a viable foetus “must be born”. 

Last month, parliament voted in favour of an amendment that will allow for a pregnancy to be terminated when a woman’s life or health is at serious risk.

The proposed legislation passed the second reading and is now at the committee stage, where further changes can be made.

Fearne told journalists that after a number of discussions with “specialists, mothers and the general public” the government will be clarifying two issues which have been raised that people are “genuinely concerned about”. 

But pro-life activist Miriam Sciberras insisted in a statement on Thursday that if the proposed amendment becomes law Malta will have "a more extreme" abortion law than most EU countries.

“It is becoming very clear that the government wishes to introduce abortion without having the mandate to do so. This is neither justifiable nor acceptable and shows a total disregard for the value of life in the womb. We ask the government to reconsider this as it is not what the people of Malta have voted for,” she said.

The coalition said that the amendment was now looking even more similar to the United Kingdom Abortion Act of 1967 which has allowed for more than 10 million abortions, 98% of which were for reasons of “mental health”.

This states that:

"A person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith:

"(a)that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or

"(b)that the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or

"(c)that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or

"(d)that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped."

The coalition urged the government to provide the necessary clarity in the text of the amendment such that any medical intervention allowed to safeguard the mother clearly excluded direct and intended harm to the unborn.